Secretary Clinton Awarded Anti-Second Amendment Consolation Prize

Arizona –-(Ammoland.com)- Twice failed presidential candidate, Secretary Hillary Clinton, received a consolation prize in San Francisco on Thursday, 14 June, 2018. The award was given by the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence at its 25th-anniversary dinner. The 25th Anniversary dinner seemed premature, as Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was a self-proclaimed strong Second Amendment supporter before her shooting in 2011, only seven years ago. From nbcbayarea.com:

The former U.S. Secretary of State under President Barack Obama spoke at the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence 25th anniversary dinner, where former Rep. Gabby Giffords awarded Clinton the Courageous Leadership Award for her ongoing efforts to strengthen common sense gun laws.Clinton said her gun safety position made her a target of the gun lobby during her campaign for president.”The gun lobby spent about $30 million against me, not having the guts to take on specific gun proposals,” Clinton said. “In fact, their ads had nothing to do with guns. They were just outright lies.”

The disconnect is easily explained. Anti-Second Amendment organizations are constantly undergoing re-branding, as people become wise to their agendas. When banning handguns became unpopular, the push became “gun control”. When “gun control” lost punch, the movement changed to “gun safety”.

The ultimate goal remains the same, while the intermediate and near-term goals are altered. The process is to pass incremental legislation that undermines the Second Amendment and leads to a disarmed population.

25 years ago, in 1993, a group known as the Legal Community Against Violence and as the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence (LCPGV), was formed. In 2017, the name was changed to the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. That is how a “Giffords” center, named for an event only seven years old, can have a 25th anniversary.

Notice the vague, imprecise, manipulative term used by Secretary Clinton to describe her efforts. “common sense gun laws.” The phrase begs the question by its nature. It assumes the argument is settled. The laws proposed are anything but common sense.

The laws would not have prevented the events used to trigger the emotional push for the law's passage. The shootings are events used to push the desired agenda. The agenda had been determined previously. That recipe has been a consistent and effective formula of the Progressive age. As mass media came under near exclusive control of those with the Progressive ideology, arguments did not matter. What mattered was control of the narrative. When you control the media, you control the narrative. When you control the narrative, you control the country.

Technological and political change has made the control problematic. It has taken three decades. The elite, Progressive, “experts” could not anticipate the changes. Their political blinders, their self-deception, and the nature of reality all prevented them from anticipating the changes.

Political talk radio formats started gaining traction after the FCC, under Reagan, freed up some regulatory rules. The change was predicted to be detrimental to conservatives.

In the early 80's, what little talk radio there was, was mostly Progressive. A few “conservatives” were on the air as an answer to the progressive voices. After the change in rules in 1987, enormous demand for alternate content to the Progressive uni-voice on television, in academia, in newspapers, in Hollywood, and on the radio, found an outlet.

When the Internet became commercial, vast numbers of silenced Constitutionalists and Conservatives found ways to talk to each other. They created their own forums, digital publications, and news outlets. The Progressive media lost their ability to shape and control the narrative.

The NRA has been a counter to the Progressive media for decades. It arguably kept the Second Amendment alive, with delaying actions, for 60 years, while the technology to effectively combat the Progressive media developed and grew.

President Donald Trump

The development of alternate voices to media controlled by ideologically indistinguishable Progressive elites, allowed the election of President Donald Trump. President Trump skillfully used new means of communicating, and the Progressive media's own blind spots, to get his message to the people.

Carl Jung wrote, “People don't have ideas. Ideas have People.” The elites of the United States have been the “people” of the Progressive idea for at least 60 years, arguably a century. But Progressivism is limited. It requires an elite group of government “experts” to control everyone else. It disdains the rest of the people as stupid and uninformed. It can only rule by fraud, trickery, manipulation, and force.

Throughout history, governments have normally ruled by fraud, trickery, manipulation, and force. Machiavelli did not create new ideas with The Prince. He described reality. The founders of the United States understood this reality.

The First Amendment was designed to prevent, or at least, minimize the fraud, trickery, and manipulation, by assuring a competition of ideas and ideologies. It was designed to prevent the domination of the media by the government.

The founders did not foresee the rise of the mass media and the takeover of that media by an ideology dedicated to fraud, trickery, and manipulation. They did not foresee the domination of the government by the media.

The Second Amendment was designed to prevent the takeover of the sovereignty of the people by force. Progressives have worked mightily to use their subversion of the First Amendment to degrade the power of the Second Amendment.

The Progressive alternative to controlling the people through fraud, trickery, and manipulation is force. Force and fraud reinforce each other. The checks and balances of the Constitution are designed to prevent this.

Perhaps, with the rise of alternatives to the old, dominant, Progressive media, the checks and balances of the Constitutional republic will restore the sovereignty of the people. That struggle is ongoing.

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

It looks to me like she is two sheets to the wind, or drunker than a skunk. Maybe a combination of illness and drinks. Who knows and who cares as long as she doesn’t have a government job anymore and never will again.

@ Wild Bill I agree but have given up most of my hopes that will happen with our current Atty. General. She must be quite confident it won’t happen because she keeps running her mouth. She must still be on Soros’ payroll.

A nicely worded and well written article. A great command of understanding what was really going on back “then.” Excellent points; great / point -counter-point discuasion. I am impressed. That does not happen on this forum very often. It’s good to know that there are some articulate people on our side.

WOW!!!
Y’all are a bunch of SICK FUCKS! LOL
Much worse than that, actually! That Trump is president is sick. That there are enough sick bastards like y’all that put him there and continue to support him and his manical ways Is downright tragic.
“Okay, Billy Bob, get yer brothers and yer muskets. We’re plum fixin’ ta attack the United States military come mornin’.”
“But Paw! The Civil War is over! It were in all the papers right about a hundred-fity year ago!”
“Fake news, boa, fake news… And that’s the thanks I get fer sendin’ ya ta skoo that one year? Wooda been much better off without it, boa. Like the rest of us uneducated fools that don’t no no better ‘en ta vote for that high faluten New York City feller that couldn’t give a tinkers dam about nuthin but his own sef. Keep yet powder dry boas! This gonna be one helluva fight but I think tha tree of us can take ’em!”
Yeah… How totally ignorant you sick fucks are. Another really sick thing is that y’all are allowed to have kids…
Sheeesh…

Very interesting: I just posted a comment as a response to another comment, and when I refreshed the page, the original comments *ALL* were gone, but three new comments (with older time stamps) were showing.
Something strange is going on.

Censorship is not strange, just abhorrent and especially so on a site that supposedly favors freedoms guaranteed by the US Constitution. I’m guessing this comment will be censored, but only after being read by Ammoland staff. Howdy boys, got those “blue pens” flying? <<< a comment likely understood only by real professional editors.

@MP, What these politicians are doing to subvert the Constitution, their oaths of office, and the American people does not really fit the Constitutional definition of “treason”. What they are doing is more betrayal. Which is why none of us dare call it treason.
We the People, that these elitist politicians are supposed to be serving, need more and stronger controls over our employees. We need to be able to fire Congress persons, judges, and bureaucrats, by Right of Recall. There should be term limits on politicians, judges, and bureaucrats. And finally, their should be penalties for violating their oaths of office.

So, the $64K question is, does Mrs. Clinton have medical problems that make her unsteady on her feet or is she simply drunk? Truthfully? Imagine her as President – how much more of the country would she have given away to foreign interests, how much more would be donated to the money laundering machine known as the clinton foundation, how much higher would taxes be, how many new gun laws outlawing most commonly owned rifles and handguns? And, given her “unsteadiness” you have to wonder who would be pulling her puppet strings?

“So, the $64K question is, does Mrs. Clinton have medical problems that make her unsteady on her feet or is she simply drunk? Truthfully? Imagine her as President – how much more of the country would”

Personally, I exhibit many of the same walking problems she does. Arthritis is a bitch.
There are several other problems that can easily show the same symptoms she does.
Drunk? I seriously doubt it. We’d know.

Hillary admits to having a weakness for Chardonnay and as much as she wallows in self pity I would imagine she doesn’t make herself suffer without her “medicine”. As to her walking ability I’m thankful we didn’t have to install handicap ramps in the WH for her. I guess that I would feel better with a gun owner and user in the WH but President Trump is far more friendly to our 2nd amendment rights, as well as the NRA, than Chardonnay Clinton would have been.

Obviously, she is drunk; drunk with the desire to be the most powerful human on Earth! She gives the impression that she thinks she possesses all of the qualifications required to warrant that position and that she is the only one who does.

If HRC were ever to attain that lofty position, would the title of “President Of The United States” still be sufficient, or would she lobby to have it changed to something more befitting her royalty ambitions?